Savannah morning news. [volume] (Savannah) 1868-1887, 1887-03-11
THE WAY 1T Is DONE.
Charleston Wants a Change in the
Counting OF Cotton.

Counting OF COTTON.
Charleston is very much exercised
over the way Savannah calculates its
cotton receipts and is Offering sugges-
tions to the National Cotton Exchange in
regard to how the counting should be
done.
4 few days ago the News and Courier
printed a statement that Savannah
counted q 900 bales, or thereab0uts, that
did not belong to this port. Supt. Bryan
stated IN reply that Savannah is acting
under a rule OF the National Exchange.
The Superintendent Of the New
Orleans Exchange has written TO
Supt. Tavel OF the Charles
ton Exchange confirming the count
made here, and says: "If the cotton has
been shipped to or via Savannah by the
East Tennessee, Virginia and Georgia
transferred to the Charleston and Savan-
nah railway, Savannah, under the system
OF counting pursued at all out ports, has
rightly counted it, and 1T should be
counted by you as gross and not net. IL,
however, the cotton has not touched Sa-
Yannah, they are in error and your count
is correct. The same trouble would arise
with US were weto count as net all cotton
consigned to our merchants form interior
points via the Louisville and Nashville
railroad, such cotton nearly all passing
through Mobile in sealed cars, yet is
counted by Mobile as net receipts and
included by US only as gross"
This apparently has not satisfied
Charleston, and Supt. Tavel has written
the New Orleans Exchange as follows:
CHARLESTON, S. c., March 8, 1887.
r. u. Lei, Assistant Secretary Cotton Ee-
change, Neto Orleans, La:
" IF o. HIIi tn
hand and contents noted. We regret that we
cannot see our way 10 counting our receipts
as you suggest. We count here the receipts
of our port. Cotton shipped TO Charleston
from Atlanta via Augusta or via Jesup and
Savannah, we equally count as shipped to
this port. Cotton that comes here from Flor
ida on the New York, Charleston anu Florida
steamers, and that lies In our docks for day
or two, we do not count in either our gross or
net. Cotton that passes Charleston junction,
whether on its way to Savannah or Whining
ton or Norfolk, if such there be, we do not
and would not count.
We suggest that it would be just as easy for
Savannah, instead OF filing its account with
innumerable cross entries. and thus swelling,
incorrectly its receipts, to count simply It's
own cotton and leave us to count simply ours.
Thus errors may more readily be avoided.
In counting receipts at interior towns, does
Vicksburg add and deduct every boat-load of
Memphis cotton that passes down the river?
Does Augusta receive and export every
carload of Athens. or Atlanta
or Macon cotton that passes
through her city? Such a system
would entail endless confusion and result in
swelling intellectually the receipts of any
town that might be a way station on a line of
railway. Would it not be better, then, for
Mobile and Savannah to stop counting cotton
that does not belong to them. rather than
that New Orleans aud Charleston should
deduct what does belong to them? AS re-
CARDS this cotton, Savannah is not an out
ward port. but simply way-station on a
through railway line.
l remain yours truly, r. A TAvEL,
Superintendent.